JPMorgan Will Pay $135M to Settle Abusive ADR Practices Claims With SEC
The settlement highlights the pitfalls of weak American Depositary Receipts compliance efforts as the SEC continues to crack down on the improper handling of ADRs and pre-release transactions. This was the SEC's eighth ADR-related action against a bank or broker and its fourth action against a depositary bank.
December 27, 2018 at 03:06 PM
4 minute read
Banks handling pre-released American Depositary Receipts, which U.S. residents use to invest in foreign companies, are taking a risk if they rely on agreements, annual certifications or the word of brokers to ensure that they're complying with the law.
Case in point: JPMorgan Chase Bank's more than $135 million settlement reached Dec. 26 with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The deal resolves charges alleging that the New York-based bank made about $71 million in revenue through abusive ADR practices in thousands of transactions that occurred from November 2011 through early 2015.
JPMorgan, which did not admit any wrongdoing, stopped offering pre-release ADRs in late 2015, according to the SEC. A spokesman for the bank, Brian Marchiony, wrote in an email that JPMorgan was “pleased to have resolved this matter, which is related to an industry practice we voluntarily ended a few years ago.” As part of the settlement, the SEC will not impose a potential civil penalty of nearly $50 million.
The settlement highlights the pitfalls of weak ADR compliance efforts as the SEC continues to crack down on the improper handling of ADRs and pre-release transactions. The JPMorgan settlement marked the SEC's eighth ADR-related action against a bank or broker and its fourth action against a depositary bank.
Earlier this month, the Bank of New York Mellon agreed to pay more than $54 million to settle an ADR enforcement action with the SEC. Other recent actions cost Citibank more than $38 million and spurred Deutsche Bank to pay a nearly $75 million settlement.
In the JPMorgan case, the SEC alleged that the bank's depositary receipts execution desk employees—they handled the issuance and cancellation of ADRs—essentially turned a blind eye to red flags that were indicative of potential abusive practices. JPMorgan asserted that it had relied on pre-release agreements and annual certifications to ensure that the ADR brokers it dealt with were playing by the rules. The employees also contacted senior staffers at the pre-release broker agencies to determine that they were complying with the law, according to the SEC.
But the SEC found that the bank's actions were “insufficient to address the known risks of pre-released ADRs” and “in light of the information that the [bank employees] had about the practices of the pre-release brokers.”
In a traditional ADR transaction, a depositary bank, such as JPMorgan, issues ADRs, which represent a portion of an ordinary share of a foreign company and can be traded on U.S. stock exchanges or over the counter, to brokers who contemporaneously deliver the corresponding number of foreign securities to the depositary's foreign custodian.
But in a pre-release transaction, which is supposed to be used to smooth out inter-jurisdictional settlement timing disparities, the broker can obtain newly issued ADRs from the depositary before delivering ordinary shares to a custodian a short time later.
The broker must “beneficially own” the ordinary shares that the ADRs represent and assign all beneficial rights, title and interest in those shares to the depositary while the pre-release transaction is underway.
The SEC alleged, in part, that JPMorgan profited by charging brokers fees for the duration of the pre-release transactions, some of which dragged on for months. Meanwhile, the brokers were profiting by lending the ADRs to securities lending desks at other larger broker-dealers at inflated rates.
“That pattern of conduit activity should have alerted [JPMorgan] personnel that the pre-release brokers themselves were most likely not beneficial owners of corresponding ordinary shares,” the SEC stated in a cease-and-desist order.
Sanjay Wadhwa, senior associate director of the SEC's New York regional office and a former associate at the New York law offices of Cahill, Gordon & Reindel and Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, stated in a news release that the agency has now “held all four depositary banks accountable for fraudulent issuances of ADRs into an unsuspecting market.”
But he added that the SEC continues to investigate “brokerage firms that profited by making use of these improperly issued ADRs.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllElon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
Ben & Jerry’s Accuses Corporate Parent of ‘Silencing’ Support for Palestinian Rights
3 minute read'It's Not About Speed': Forging Strong Legal Department-Law Firm Relationships Starts With Humility, Trust
6 minute readNLRB Bans 'Captive Audience' Meetings, Yanking Away Platform Employers Used to Combat Unionizing
Trending Stories
- 1How to Support Law Firm Profitability: Train Partners Up
- 2Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 3Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 4Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 5X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250